I am a research fellow at the Hoover Institution, at Stanford, and the Cullen Professor of Economics at the University of Houston. I am also a research professor at the German Institute for Economic Research Berlin. My specialties are Russia and Comparative Economics, and I am adding China to my portfolio. I have written more than 20 books on economics, Russia and comparative economics. I blog at paulgregorysblog.blogspot.com.

Obama on Benghazi: Believe Me or Your Lying Eyes (Or At Least Wait Until After the Election)

In this handout photo provided by The White House, U.S. President Barack Obama signs a condolence book in memory of Ambassador Chris Stevens, as Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton (L) looks on, September 12, 2012 in Washington,(Image credit: Getty Images via @daylife)

In Duck Soup, Groucho Marx pleads his innocence to his wealthy matronly fiancé, who catches him smooching with a show girl: “Who are you gonna believe, me or your own eyes?”

Since September 12, the Obama administration has been asking us to believe him, his press secretary, and his proxies that our Libyan ambassador and three other consulate officials were killed by a spontaneous mob driven into frenzy by an anti-Muslim film produced by an unknown Christian film maker. He asks that we not believe his state department or top intelligence officials who testify that this narrative is false. Nor should we notice the coincidence of the attack taking place on 9/11 or that this was revenge for the fifteen top al Qaeda leaders killed by drones under Obama. Of course, Obama spiking the “I-killed-Osama” football at the Democrat convention had nothing to do with this either. Nor did the Libyan President warn of impending violence three days earlier.

We should at least wait until Obama’s own investigation is complete – that is, until after the election to decide what really happened!

The following partial CNN chronology reveals the collapse of the Obama narrative and his futile attempts to keep it alive.

Note that this chronology tells us what the various officials say on record and sometimes under oath, but the truth would have been known within hours or a day. We now know that there were surveillance cameras on site and a U.S. drone overhead to record the fact that there was no spontaneous protest and that this was a planned coordinated attack – the key fact that was initially denied. Surviving consulate personnel could have been debriefed immediately. Hence it is clear that the Obama administration knew almost from the beginning but chose to obfuscate the official record for political gain.

The cover up began immediately on September 12 with Hillary Clinton’s statement that “some have sought to justify this vicious behavior, along with the protest that took place at our embassy in Cairo yesterday, as a response to inflammatory material posted on the Internet….”

White House press secretary, Jay Carney, on September 13: “The protests we’re seeing around the region are in reaction to this movie. They are not directly in reaction to any policy of the United States or the government of the United States or the people of the United States.”

A senior U.S. official on September 13 is one of the first to contradict the Obama narrative: The Benghazi violence was “not an innocent mob… The video or 9/11 made a handy excuse and could be fortuitous from their perspective, but this was a clearly planned military-type attack.”

Carney on September 14 continued to deny the obvious: ”We were not aware of any actionable intelligence indicating that an attack on the U.S. mission in Benghazi was planned or imminent.”

Susan Rice, U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, on CBS (Sunday September 16) dug the hole deeper:

“We do not have information at present that leads us to conclude that this was premeditated or preplanned….Our current best assessment, based on the information that we have at present, is that, in fact, what this began as, it was a spontaneous – not a premeditated – response to what had transpired in Cairo… .”

Carney on September 18:“Our belief based on the information we have is it was the video that caused the unrest in Cairo, and the video and the unrest in Cairo that helped — that precipitated some of the unrest in Benghazi and elsewhere. What other factors were involved is a matter of investigation.”

The Director of National Intelligence before Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs (September 19) trashed the Obama narrative under oath: “They were killed in the course of a terrorist attack on our embassy. … At this point, what I would say is that a number of different elements appear to have been involved in the attack, including individuals connected to militant groups that are prevalent in eastern Libya, particularly the Benghazi area, as well we are looking at indications that individuals involved in the attack may have had connections to al Qaeda or al Qaeda affiliates, in particular al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb.”

Carney on September 19 continued to plead ignorance: “… Right now I’m saying we don’t have evidence at this point that this was premeditated or preplanned to coincide on a — to happen on a specific date or coincide with that anniversary.”

Only on September 20 (nine days after the tragedy) did Carney finally concede: “It is, I think, self-evident that what happened in Benghazi was a terrorist attack. Our embassy was attacked violently, and the result was four deaths of American officials.” (Why did the affair become self-evident within one day?)

With his narrative collapsing on all sides, Obama still refused to abandon the video story in a town hall meeting organized by Univision Network on September 20: “What we do know is that the natural protests that arose because of the outrage over the video were used as an excuse by extremists to see if they can also directly harm U.S. interests.”

Hillary Clinton on September 21 drove another nail into the video coffin “What happened in Benghazi was a terrorist attack…”

Obama on ABC’s “The View” on September 25, asked about Hillary Clinton’s act-of-terrorism statement: “We’re still doing an investigation. There’s no doubt that (with) the kind of weapons that were used, the ongoing assault, that it wasn’t just a mob action. We don’t have all the information yet, so we’re still gathering it….”

Background briefing by senior state department official (October 9): “The lethality and the number of armed people are unprecedented… And so it is unprecedented, in fact, it would be very, very hard to find precedent for an attack like (it) in recent diplomatic history.”

With the video story so widely demolished, Obama could only plead with voters to wait until all the facts are in.

Post Your Comment

Post Your Reply

Forbes writers have the ability to call out member comments they find particularly interesting. Called-out comments are highlighted across the Forbes network. You'll be notified if your comment is called out.